XMLP WG telcon minutes, 26 January 2005

1. Roll
Present 8/7
BEA Systems, Mark Nottingham
Canon, Herve Ruellan
IBM, David Fallside (chair)
IBM, Noah Mendelsohn
Microsoft Corporation, Martin Gudgin
Nokia, Michael Mahan (scribe)
Sun Microsystems, Marc Hadley
W3C, Yves Lafon
Excused
BEA Systems, David Orchard
Canon, Jean-Jacques Moreau
IBM, John Ibbotson
Microsoft Corporation, Jeff Schlimmer
Sun Microsystems, Tony Graham
Regrets
SAP AG, Gerd Hoelzing
SeeBeyond, Pete Wenzel
Absent
IONA Technologies, Suresh Kodichath
Oracle, Jeff Mischkinsky
Oracle, Anish Karmarkar
SAP AG, Volker Wiechers
2. Agenda Review
3. Approval of 5 Jan minutes
Approved without objection.
4. Action Item Review
Yves: Update edcopy from REC master is DONE
All others, no change
5. Status reports and misc
Status of REC
We are now in REC for XOP/MTOM/RRSHB
Charter extension
Yves: the extension will occur this week
David: the WG meet on an occasional basis only during this extension period
XOP media representation
Done by Yves.
See http://www.iana.org/assignments/media-types/application/xop+xml registered 15 Dec 2004
Yves - the fast track process is working
XMLP/WSD Task Force and WSDL Media Type document.
Anish is not here, no report
XMPP
David: the JSP is looking for an informal review
Noah: I did send comments to the list
David: can you describe your comments here
Noah: Overall a good job, I recommend that at some time they should talk about
Intermediaries
WebMethod/Get
attachments / MTOM/XOP/RRSHB
SOAP 1.1 / 1.2 co-existence
Additional review items:
Further review of WSDL should happen
HTTP state machine, MEP, Did they use the binding framework
XMLP Binding Framework examples do not sufficently describe the desired
detail for binding description
SOAP 1.2 Recommendation maintenance
Primer - David did go back to W3C for the non-normative primer status to get it to REC
David: It would be tough that the primer would have to start from LC
The W3C agreed and OKAYed to start from PR with the Primer
We should ask for it and we should get it.
Part 1
Gudge: all the errata is rolled in
some text to be near table 3 had a collision
change to character code around white space - changed all occurances with a
'MUST', didn't change places with a 'MAY' partly because the suggested language
didn't work. Doesn't believe we need new language for the 'MAY' cases
David: so part 1 is then done?
Gudge: yes
Gudge: there is boilerplate issue for YVES
Yves: also the XML, link issue,
Gudge: viability/liability was corrected in stylesheet
Marc: I fixed it too,
Part2
Marc: all errata rolled in
found clash of 2 errata, rolled in the 1st trivial change
also made change to status in commented out section
also made changes to make it work with the dtd in cvs. Edited dtd in cvs.
Added Loc location items not specified in the DTD.
Part2 is in good shape too
Test Collection
Anish not here for that.
David: so where are the docs?
Gudge: in the place where all edcopies are. All dcos are in XML
David: Can we regenerate the HTML?
Marc: Will do, for both, after this call
David: and then send email to list with url for the regened html
Yves: will also move the Primer to the right place
David: can Yves send the email with the urls to this regened doc.
Yves: affirmative
David: we can be in position next week to point at what is collectively called: 'Proposed Edited Recs'
David: we believe the Primer is ready, all errata are folded in, according to Nilo.
David: Lastly, change request for the errata - Marc
Marc: SOAP detail right whether soap detail was for faults in the body or for
any part of the message Sec 5.4.5 Part 1 (LC 322)
Options are to strike 'detail related to the SOAP body'
or replace body with message suggested in email.
David: Are there any objections to striking the text?
Group: NO OBJECTION. Marc will make change.
ACTION: Take Marc's modified proposal - and strike the text rather than change 'body' to 'message'
David: Things to take away from the meeting
1) provide comments on XMPP
2) look at part 1,2 & primer for sanity check
3) congrats to the group on going Rec with XOP/MTOM/RRSHB
Mark: WS-Addressing may be creating new soap binding and soap MEP. WS-A may want
XMLP to review. This is just a heads up.